Preamble

The House met at a Quarter before Three of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.

Oral Answers to Questions — INTERNEES (DOMINIONS).

Mr. Wedgwood: asked the Under-Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs whether he will make representations to try to secure the return to this country, or the liberation in Canada, of those class C aliens who were sent to Canada by mistake?

Mr. Vernon Bartlett: asked the Under-Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs whether the Dominion Governments now responsible for alien refugees sent from this country have been given all the information available so that they may distinguish between the few who might be enemy agents and the many who have given proof, in German concentration camps and eleswhere, of their hatred of Hitler?

Mr. Mander: asked the Under-Secretary of State for Dominon Affairs whether he will give an assurance that full information will be supplied to the Dominion Governments to which interned refugees are being sent, differentiating clearly between those who were interned for safety reasons and those who are considered refugees from Nazi oppression, and who are friendly and loyal to the Allied cause?

Mr. Sorensen: asked the Under-Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs whether he has been in communication with Dominion Governments respecting the condition and treatment of internees sent from this country; whether he has obtained an assurance that internees shall not be treated overseas as hostile prisoners of war; and whether he has conveyed to

those Governments the desirability of applying to internees the more improved and enlightened standards of treatment now becoming operative in this country?

The Under-Secretary of State for the Home Department (Mr. Peake): I have been asked to reply. There is no risk of any confusion between prisoners of war and civilian internees sent to the Dominions. As regards the latter, my right hon. Friend is fully alive to the necessity for supplying to the Government of any Dominion to which internees have been, or may be, sent as much information as possible regarding them, in order to ensure proper discrimination in their treatment. A communication on the subject has already been sent to the Government of Canada, which is the only Dominion that has yet received any internees, and one will shortly be sent to Australia, to which country internees are now on their way. It is hoped to make arrangements, in consultation with the Governments of Canada and Australia, for the return to this country of those whose release can properly be authorised.

Mr. Wedgwood: Are the Home Office alive to the fact that many of those sent out were marked "A" and have been interned, and might just as easily have been marked "C"; further, that they were interned marked "A" because of their Socialist actions, which are no longer a bar?

Mr. Peake: I am aware of the fact stated by my right hon. Friend. We have already sent to Canada information as to the distinction to be drawn between the different categories, and we are following that information up with detailed information about each individual internee.

Mr. Mander: Has any information been received from the Canadian Government as to the attitude they propose to take in regard to various categories of internees; and in any case that they will not place A, B and C men together in the same internment camp?

Mr. Peake: We have advised the Canadian Government as to the distinction to be drawn, both as regards A, B and C, and as to the privileges to be afforded to the different categories.

Mr. Sorensen: Can we have a report upon the conditions and treatment of these internees in Canada?

Mr. Peake: Certainly; I am inviting the Dominion Government to send us a communication on that matter.

Miss Rathbone: Unless the list is sent to the Dominion Governments, how can they tell which are A, B and C, etc.? It is very important that the detailed list should go very quickly, otherwise I do not see how the Dominions can distinguish between one category and another.

Mr. Peake: They can distinguish, because when we were making shipment to the Dominion we placed the different categories upon different ships.

Mr. Graham White: To whom should applications be addressed for the return of aliens wrongfully deported?

Mr. Peake: We are arranging to issue a White Paper as to the release of internees and the normal procedure to be followed, that is to say, notification to the Home Office.

Mr. Genvil Hall: Is it not a fact that many lads of 16 years of age have gone out? Could they not apply for release?

Oral Answers to Questions — TRADE AND COMMERCE.

INDUSTRIAL ART AND DESIGN.

Mr. Ellis Smith: asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will refuse to sanction the articles of association of the Central Institute of Art and Design and not allow it to function, pending consultation with all interests who are interested in any form; whether he is satisfied that the governing body responsible for the administration of the National Register of Industrial Art Designers is fully efficient; and whether he will review the whole question in the light of future needs?

The President of the Board of Trade (Sir Andrew Duncan): The Board of Trade have entertained an application made by the association under Section 18 of the Companies Act, 1929, to be registered, with the licence of the Board of Trade, as a company with limited liability, but without the addition of the word "Limited" to its name. In accordance with the usual procedure, an application so entertained has to be advertised in two successive weeks. Any objections which may be raised to the

grant of the Board's licence are considered before the licence is granted, and if the hon. Member will forward to me a statement of the objections on which his Question is based, I will see that they are fully considered. I have no reason to think that the governing body of the National Register of Industrial Art Designers is in any way inadequate, nor have I received representations on this subject.

Mr. Smith: I do not propose to take this matter any further, at this stage, Mr. Speaker, if the right hon. Gentleman undertakes to hold up the articles of association, pending further representations being made.

Sir A. Duncan: I shall be very glad to consider any representations.

COAL EXPORTS.

Mr. Shinwell: asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he has any statement to make on the reduction in exports due to the loss of French and Italian markets; and whether he has any plans for the creation of new markets to make up the deficiency?

Sir A. Duncan: Coal was by far the largest item of our exports both to France and Italy. Since the war, the total volume of all exports to France had much increased, and considerable changes also took place in the make-up of the trade, owing to France's situation and war needs: In this period, indeed, our exports were made more to assist our Ally in the struggle against the common enemy than for commercial reasons, and the loss of the French market must not therefore be regarded as comparable in its effects with the loss of a neutral market taking a similar amount of exports. A considerable proportion of the goods exported to France would have been very valuable to our own war effort. Every effort is being made to find other markets for those goods which do not fall into this category. Of these, coal is much the most important and, as my hon. Friend the Secretary for Mines stated in reply to a Question on 23rd July, the coal industry is being consulted as to the best methods to promote this trade.

Mr. Shinwell: Do we understand from the answer of the right hon. Gentleman that the loss of the French market is


of little consequence, despite the fact that we exported coal and other commodities which are of primary importance; and can he rely entirely on the good will and the efforts of the coal industry in regard to facilities in the search for new markets?

Sir A. Duncan: I have not said, and I hope I have not implied, that the loss of the French market is of little consequence.

Mr. Shinwell: Are we to understand from the right hon. Gentleman that the export of goods to France meant very little to us in war-time?

Sir William Davison: Is my right hon. Friend aware that, despite the appeal that people should store coal or coke, it is impossible in many parts of England to get coal or coke, and that this is a source of purchase which is available?

Sir A. Duncan: I hope I did make it clear that our export trade to France for the last few months consisted in part of many things which would have been welcome at home, and that the loss of the market of France in those products is not really a loss to us at all. On the other hand, for the other part, which we would gladly export to France, it will be our task to find an alternative market.

BANK HOLIDAY (CANCELLATION.)

Mr. Pym: asked the President of the Board of Trade whether it is the desire of the Government that business establishments throughout the country should remain open on Monday, 5th August, particularly having regard to the difficulties which may otherwise result in the reception of goods?

Sir A. Duncan: Yes, Sir. August Bank Holiday has been cancelled by Defence Regulations, and it is the wish of the Government that business should proceed normally on that day. I would add that, on any day on which it may be found necessary to close establishments for repair or cleaning or other reasons, it is desirable, in the national interest, that arrangements should be made for the reception of goods, in order to avoid both wastage of labour, time and fuel, and also to avoid delays in the clearance of traffic.

Oral Answers to Questions — ECONOMIC WARFARE.

CONTRABAND CONTROL (NAVICERTS).

Mr. Bartlett: asked the Minister of Economic Warfare whether, in view of the fact that German occupation now extends to the Spanish frontier, a system of contraband control will be instituted over the imports of Spain and Portugal?

Mr. Charles Brown: asked the Minister of Economic Warfare whether he has any statement to make concerning new measures to enforce the blockade?

The Minister of Economic Warfare (Mr. Dalton): With the permission of my hon. Friends, I will answer these Questions together in a statement at the end of Questions.

Later—

Mr. Dalton: German occupation of the West European coastline from the North Cape to the Pyrenees has greatly changed the conditions of the economic war. The German Armies have succeeded in overrunning large parts of Western Europe, but the overseas imports which they require are still barred from the seas commanded by the Royal Navy. Many fewer ships are now engaged on legitimate neutral trade between Europe and the Americas. Moreover, we must now control, not only shipping approaching the Mediterranean or the North Sea, but all shipping crossing the Atlantic. To apply this control in the old way would mean diverting many ships far out of their course to contraband bases in British waters, either in this island or in West Africa. To avoid imposing such grave inconveniences upon shippers, shipowners and crews, His Majesty's Government have decided to extend the navicert system to all seaborne goods consigned to any European port, as well as to certain Atlantic islands and to certain neutral ports in North Africa. In future ships sailing from a neutral port to any such destination must obtain navicerts for all items of cargo, and in addition a ship navicert at the last port of loading. Any consignment not navicerted and any ship without a ship navicert, will henceforth be liable to seizure by our patrols. The same rules will apply to outgoing trade. Ships sailing from European ports, or from certain Atlantic islands, or from certain neutral ports in North Africa must have certificates of non-enemy origin for


all items of their cargoes, and any ship whose cargo is not fully certificated will be liable to be seized together with all uncertificated items of the cargo. An Order-in-Council giving effect to these changes will be issued forthwith.
It has been suggested in some quarters that we intend to extend the blockade to certain neutral countries. This is not so. Where supplies can reach such neutrals without the risk of falling into the hands of the enemy we shall grant navicerts on such a scale as to allow imports adequate for domestic consumption, but not for reexport to other countries. Moreover, it will be the policy of His Majesty's Government not merely to allow such adequate supplies to pass through our controls, but to assist neutral countries to obtain them. These measures will greatly benefit those engaged in honest neutral trade. Delays in such trade, due to the exercise of our controls, will be much reduced. At the same time, a heavy blow will be struck at those who seek to elude our controls and to carry supplies either to or from the enemy. Our friends will be further encouraged, and our enemies discomforted, by some ingenious provisions which my right hon. Friend the Minister of Shipping will, I understand, immediately announce.
Finally, I would recall that on 2nd July I informed the House that contraband control had been extended to French territory under enemy control and that no goods were being allowed to reach the enemy through unoccupied France. After a most careful review of all the circumstances, His Majesty's Government have now decided, with regret, that in present conditions they must treat all metropolitan France, as well as Algeria, Tunisia and French Morocco, in the same manner, for the purposes of contraband and enemy export control, as enemy-controlled territory. Goods destined for these territories are, therefore, liable to be seized as contraband and goods originating in, or owned by persons in, such territories, are liable to be placed in prize. These steps, which I have now announced, are designed to smooth the path of genuine neutral trade, while increasing the strength of our blockade and avoiding all unnecessary calls upon the Royal Navy.

SPAIN (OIL IMPORTS).

Mr. Silkin: asked the Minister of Economic Warfare whether shipments of oil and oil-products to Spain from America are greatly in excess of last year's quantities; whether he has information to show that oil is reaching Germany from Spain; and whether he will give an assurance that every endeavour will be made to ensure that no more oil reaches Spain than she legitimately requires for her own normal consumption?

Mr. Lipson: asked the Minister of Economic Warfare whether he is taking steps to prevent the importation into Spain of oil in excess of her normal requirements?

Mr. Dalton: Shipments of oil and oil products to Spain from America during the first half of this year have been substantially greater than during the corresponding period of last year. Before the collapse of France the only route by which oil could reach Germany from Spain was by sea across the Western Mediterranean and through Italy, and we relied upon French naval patrols to prevent such traffic. Since the collapse of France many features of the situation have become obscure, and I am sending an officer of my Ministry to Spain this week in order to confer with the Spanish authorities and with His Majesty's Ambassador at Madrid. The desire of His Majesty's Government is to enable Spain to receive adequate supplies of oil for her own internal consumption, but not for re-export, and to maintain her oil stocks at a reasonable and steady level.

Mr. Silkin: In view of the fact that the exports for this year are greater than last year, is it not obvious that Spain has been allowed to accumulate stocks of oil which may possibly be used against us?

Mr. Quintin Hogg: In view of the fact that Spain is non-belligerent, why give her any oil at all?

Mr. Dalton: In the light of the answer that I gave, I think it is evident that the stocks of oil in Spain are likely to be at a higher level now than they were a year ago, and it is precisely to investigate this and kindred matters that I am sending my oil adviser to Spain.

Mr. Lipson: Then I presume the hon. Gentleman's answer means that the stocks in Spain will be taken into account in determining how much will be allowed to go to Spain in future? Will he give an assurance that Spain will not be allowed to play the part which Italy played prior to her entry into the war?

Mr. Dalton: The stocks of oil, when ascertained, will obviously be an element in determining the future import requirements. With regard to Italy, I hope we have all learned a lesson from that experience.

Mr. Wedgwood: Can we ensure that the credits we are making to Spain will not be used to purchase oil?

Mr. Dalton: I think that is a different question, and I am not sure that it falls within my Department.

Mr. Shinwell: asked the Minister of Economic Warfare whether he has any information on the imports of lubricating oil into Spain; and whether he has any reason to believe that some portion of this oil is passing into German hands?

Mr. Dalton: Yes, Sir, I have a good deal of information on the subject of these imports. I have no evidence of reexports of lubricating oil to Germany, but stocks in Spain appear to be so high relatively to domestic consumption that no navicerts are now being issued.

Mr. Shinwell: While appreciating the decision of the right hon. Gentleman, is he not aware that many months ago it was decided to operate navicerts in order to prevent contraband proceeding to neutral countries which might pass into the hands of the enemy, and why, after all the activity in relation to oil, has he now decided to take action or why has action not been taken very much sooner?

Mr. Dalton: I think that perhaps my hon. Friend will get some part of the answer to his inquiry if he will await the statement which I shall make at the end of Questions on the navicert question generally.

Mr. Shinwell: But does the right hon. Gentleman not realise that we were told quite categorically that the navicert system was to be put into operation in January last, and now, many months afterwards, we are still discussing whether it is to be put into operation?

Mr. Dalton: The navicerts have not been compulsory up to now. They have been a convenience availed of by certain shippers and shipowners. I think the hon. Gentleman had better wait for my statement at the end of Questions.

Mr. Garro Jones: Has His Majesty's Ambassador in Spain been requested to inquire of the Spanish Government whether they are selling oil to our enemies across the Pyrenees? Whether the answer is in the negative or in the affirmative, will it not provide the right hon. Gentleman with a basis for action?

Mr. Dalton: I have already stated in answer to a previous Question that I am sending an officer out to make contact with the Spanish Government.

Mr. Gallacher: Is it not the case that at this time, when America decided to restrict the supply of oil to Spain, the Government made an agreement with Spain which provides for the supply of oil?

Mr. Dalton: The hon. Gentleman, as usual, is completely deluded.

AMERICAN SURPLUS PRODUCTS.

Mr. Price: asked the Minister of Economic Warfare whether he will consider what steps can be taken to assist the Government of the United States of America in securing markets for, or holding over for a time, the surplus products of the American Continent?

Mr. Dalton: The question of surpluses in relation to the blockade is under continuous examination by my Ministry. A Ministerial sub-committee of the Economic Policy Committee has recently been set up to formulate policy on this question in its wider aspects. As my hon. Friend will be aware, the question has recently been discussed at the Havana Conference. His Majesty's Government have already intimated to the United States Government their great interest in the general question of world surpluses and their readiness to co-operate in the study of any possible solution of the problems.

"ARANDORA STAR."

Mr. Wedgwood: asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will order an inquiry into the discipline and circumstances connected with the loss of anti-Nazi Germans and anti-Fascist Italians in


the "Arandora Star," in particular as to the putting up of a Nazi flag in a mess-room and forcing the anti-Nazis to salute it, and the locking up of 200 below at the time of the sinking?

The Secretary of State for War (Mr. Eden): I have made inquiries, and have been unable to obtain confirmation of the alleged incident as to the Nazi flag. I am definitely assured that no internees were locked up below decks or elsewhere.

Mr. Wedgwood: Why was it that the survivors from the "Arandora Star" were immediately shipped off abroad before they could give any evidence or information?

Mr. Eden: That is another question, but I have caused inquiries to be made of the chief officer of the ship, who was one of the gallant crew who did their best to save these people, and he is quite definite that nobody was locked up either below decks or anywhere else. His evidence is quite sufficient for me.

Mr. Logan: Having seen the boat and the crew, is the right hon. Gentleman satisfied that there was no Nazi flag flying on board that ship?

Sir Irving Albery: Is it not regrettable that Questions of this kind should be put unless there is definite evidence justifying them?

Mr. Wedgwood: On a point of Order, Mr. Speaker. I think I am entitled to point out to the right hon. Gentleman, to you, Sir, and to the House that it is a matter for the honour of this country that there should be nothing of this sort happening. There should be a full inquiry.

Oral Answers to Questions — BRITISH ARMY.

FOREIGN VOLUNTEERS.

Mr. Wedgwood: asked the Secretary of State for War whether he can give any hope of the early formation of a foreign legion officered by British officers in which friendly aliens in this country, refused for the British Army, could enlist and obtain at least training and discipline?

Mr. Eden: As I explained in the answer which I gave to my right hon. Friend and to my hon. Friend the Member for Ealing (Sir F. Sanderson) on

Tuesday last, French, Polish, Czech, Dutch, Norwegian and Belgian units are being organised and equipped, and friendly aliens who do not join any of these national forces may be enlisted in the Auxiliary Military Pioneer Corps. A number are so serving already.

Mr. Wedgwood: There is no question, then, of their being allowed to serve actively?

Mr. Eden: The Auxiliary Military Pioneer Corps is serving actively.

Mr. Wedgwood: Not with rifles.

Mr. Silverman: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether, when he talks of friendly aliens, he is thinking of aliens who are friendly in the strict sense of the word, that is to say, in the territorial sense?

Mr. Eden: No, Sir.

COUNTY REGIMENTS.

Mr. Bartlett: asked the Secretary of State for War whether, in view of the possibility that the war may be fought out on British soil, and of the consequent importance of a knowledge of local topography and conditions, he will, as far as military circumstances allow, keep county regiments in those counties whose names they bear?

Mr. Eden: On reflection, I feel sure that my hon. Friend will appreciate that his Question pre-supposes a static defence for the Field Army which does not accord with our present strategy.

HIGHER COMMANDS.

Mr. De la Bère: asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will bring to the notice of the Army Council the desirability of selecting from the lower ranks of serving officers of the Army a dozen or more officers, not above the rank of captain, who should be specially trained and afterwards appointed to take over higher command, in view of the importance of utilising the brains, imagination and initiative which exists amongst the thousands of officers now serving who have not attained field rink?

Mr. Eden: All promotion to higher acting and temporary rank in war is by merit and not by seniority. There is, thus, every chance for the young officer of outstanding merit to reach higher rank.

Mr. De la Bère: Does my right hon. Friend not realise that modern warfare requires both drive and initiative, and that antiquity and obsolete and defunct minds are quite useless?

Mr. Eden: I do not know whether my hon. Friend is referring to myself?

Mr. De la Bère: No, Sir.

Mr. Eden: As far as the General Staff and the general officers now commanding are concerned, I do not recognise the hon. Gentleman's definition.

Mr. De la Bère: But somebody must initiate the beginning in these matters.

Captain Bellenger: Can the right hon. Gentleman state how many junior officers who are not Regular serving officers have the chance of rising much higher than major, even in this war?

Mr. Eden: The hon. and gallant Gentleman surely knows enough of the Army to answer that question for himself.

HOME GUARD.

Mr. Glenvil Hall: asked the Secretary of State for War why Mr. Steele, of Chalfont Heights, Buckinghamshire, an ex-service man, who applied in proper form about two months ago to join the Local Defence Volunteers, has not yet been enrolled, although the section for his area is under strength?

Mr. Eden: I have ascertained that Mr. Steele's registration form was posted by the police to the company commander, but that the latter did not receive it. This is being explained to Mr. Steele, and he is being informed that he can now be enrolled.

Mr. Hall: Is it not rather curious that this is the second instance in this area? These forms cannot always be going wrong. Will the right hon. Gentleman not instruct those in charge that political bias must not enter into the question?

Mr. Speaker: rose—

Mr. Hall: Is there anything wrong in what I have asked?

Mr. Speaker: It did not appear to me to need an answer.

Mr. Hall: The Minister was getting up to answer it.

Mr. Speaker: Yes, but it does not follow that an answer was needed.

Mr. Hall: rose—

Mr. Speaker: We must get on with the Questions. There are over 100 on the Paper.

Mr. Glenvil Hall: asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that the Local Defence Volunteers River Section, Thames Embankment, have been ordered by their company commander to provide themselves with uniform and kit, costing from £4 to £10, on the grounds that this has been prescribed by the authorities and has indicated that those unwilling to purchase kit in this way could resign; and whether this order has been issued with War Office sanction?

Mr. Eden: I am informed that no such order as that suggested was given by the company commander, but that the members of the company themselves wished to wear the blue reefer jacket and trousers and yachting cap which they all possess.

Lieut.-Colonel Wickham: asked the Secretary of State for War what arrangements are contemplated to provide the means of livelihood for Local Defence Volunteers and their families should the former be called up for a period of days, or longer, in order to assist in repelling attempts at invasion?

Mr. Eden: The Home Guard is a voluntary, unpaid, part-time force, and its members will not normally be absent from their homes, except for their ordinary spells of duty. It is recognised, however, that circumstances may arise in the event of an attempt at invasion when, as a result of the exigencies of the military situation and in areas directly affected by the attempted invasion, volunteers may not be able to rejoin their families for a few days or even for more extended periods. In such circumstances, the military authorities will accept full responsibility for feeding the volunteers themselves, and provision will be available for their families, if they are in need.

Mr. Gallacher: Is the Minister aware of the very important point that many of these men are out night after night, and have to go to work the following day? Should not something be done to meet their case?

Mr. Tinker: asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will consider providing Army footwear to members of the Home Defence as, during the coming winter, good strong boots will be necessary to keep them fit for the duties they will undertake?

Mr. Eden: I am glad to be able to inform my hon. Friend that members of the Home Guard are to be supplied with boots.

Mr. Tinker: Can the right hon. Gentleman say when he is likely to complete the whole supply that is required?

Mr. Eden: I am afraid I cannot answer that question.

Mr. Glenvil Hall: Will the Secretary of State for War supply first country areas where men have to go through long grass during the night and have to go to work in the same boots the next day?

Mr. Eden: I will look into that matter.

Mr. Hall: Will the right hon. Gentleman do something?

Mr. George Griffiths: Will the right hon. Gentleman see that miners who leave their shoes and clogs at the pit have these shoes first?

Sir Robert Young: asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that an ex-soldier who joins the Home Guard is not allowed to wear his discharge badge on his uniform; what order prevents such a man from showing that he was a member of His Majesty's Forces; and will he state the reason for such disallowance?

Mr. Eden: The silver war badge was instituted in 1916 for those who had been discharged as physically unfit, and was intended for wear with civilian clothes. It was later permitted to be worn with uniform by those who rejoined, but this concession was withdrawn in 1922, when the wearing of wound stripes and chevrons denoting overseas service also ceased.

Mr. Tinker: asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that when members of the Home Guard are on night duty many of them have to go on to their employment before they go home; and will he consider allowing some form of grant to each unit to meet the

expense they are put to at the present time to supply needed refreshment in such cases?

Mr. Eden: Yes, Sir. Arrangements have been made whereby a member of the Home Guard is eligible for a subsistence allowance of 1s. 6d. for a continuous period of duty of between five and ten hours, and of 3s. for a continuous period of duty in excess of ten hours.

COAST DEFENCE WORKS.

Mr. Windsor: asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will ensure that in the construction of coast defence works there shall be prior consultation between the civil and military authorities, so that work completed by the former at considerable expense shall not be subsequently condemned by the latter?

Mr. Eden: Instructions have been issued, as a result of which I am confident that the civil authorities are now aware that these works should not be erected without prior consultation with the military authorities.

PRIVATE SOLDIER (MEDICAL EXAMINATION).

Mr. Mander: asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is now able to state the decision arrived at in the case of Private R. C. Williamson, concerning whom a promise was made, on 28th May, that a report would be made on his case by the county tuberculosis officer?

Mr. Eden: Arrangements were made for Private Williamson to go into hospital yesterday for examination by the county tuberculosis officer. I regret the delay, which has been due to the fact that the unit has been on the move, but in the meantime the soldier has been reported to be in excellent health.

Mr. Mander: In view of the very long delay, extending over many months, will my right hon. Friend see that a decision is reached at the earliest possible moment?

Mr. Eden: This man has gone into hospital, and is now being examined. I cannot say more.

RESERVE OF OFFICERS.

Mr. Liddall: asked the Secretary of State for War whether, as officers embodied in the Royal Army Reserve of


Officers who have been for many years liable to recall and who, by virtue of that liability, have been recalled prior to the outbreak of war, are not allowed to have calculated any period of their Reserve service towards promotion and higher pay, he will propose some step to adjust this matter in favour of officers so affected?

Mr. Eden: No, Sir. The general principle governing the reckoning of service for time promotion and increments of pay is that only full pay service counts for these purposes. This excludes service in the Regular Army Reserve of Officers during which no duty is performed.

Mr. Liddall: Am I to understand from that answer that trained officers who have been ready and willing to serve for over 20 years are to get no priority in their present employment?

Mr. Eden: No, Sir. What my hon. Friend is to understand is that it would not be fair to allow those who have not been actively serving but who have been on the Reserve of Officers to count for promotion in the same way as those who have been actively serving.

DEPENDANTS' ALLOWANCES.

Mr. Debbie: asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is now in a position to make a statement relative to an increase in allowances to soldiers' wives and dependants owing to the increasing difficulty of meeting their financial obligations?

Mr. Eden: As I informed my hon. Friend on 2nd July, I have the position under review. I have no further statement to make at present.

Mr. Dobbie: Is the Minister satisfied that the allowance made to a soldier and his wife is adequate to give them a decent standard of life?

Mr. Eden: I have said that I have the position under review. I cannot go beyond that.

Mr. Dobbie: Will the Minister be in a position to make a statement on the matter before Christmas? In view of the long delay and the many questions I have addressed to him on this subject, will he give us some idea when the matter will be dealt with?

Mr. Eden: I have told the hon. Member that the matter is under review. I hope to be in a position to make a statement next week; but I do not want to give an undertaking, because there are many matters to be considered in relation to this subject.

Mr. Mathers: asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is now in a position to grant allowances to dependent children in a soldier's household who are not members of his family and not legally adopted?

Mr. Eden: Yes, Sir. It has now been decided that, for the period of the war, claims may in future be made for an allowance in respect of any child who is being brought up in a soldier's household at the expense of the soldier, and who has been so brought up and maintained for a period of at least six months prior to the claim being made, provided that no payment towards the maintenance of the child is being received from any other source.

Mr. Mathers: To what extent will these allowances apply retrospectively?

Mr. Eden: I am afraid I must have notice of that question.

Mr. Buchanan: Will the right hon. Gentleman see that steps are taken to make that decision known?

Mr. Eden: I think that the matter, in view of the announcement to-day, will no doubt receive a wider publicity.

Mr. Buchanan: The public do not know, and will the right hon. Gentleman take steps to give the matter greater publicity?

Mr. Eden: Yes, Sir, I am taking steps to see that the Forces themselves get to know about it.

Mr. G. Griffiths: Will those who have already applied for this allowance have to apply again, or will they get it as a result of their first application?

Mr. Eden: They will have to put in an application now.

Mr. Mathers: Will the right hon. Gentleman look into the question of back dating?

Mr. Dobbie: asked the Secretary of State for War whether the Government will continue to pay to the dependant of a member of the Armed Forces the voluntary allotment made to such dependant in the event of a member of the Forces being made a prisoner of war; and will such payment be continued to the end of the war?

Mr. Eden: The answer is "Yes, Sir," unless the soldier himself cancels the authority.

Captain Bellenger: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether, during the term that they are incarcerated in Germany as prisoners of war, other ranks are entitled only to this separation allowance, or are they being granted the same facilities which, I understand, are extended to officers, namely, the pay of their rank and merit allowances?

Mr. Eden: This is a question that I dealt with fully the other day, and perhaps my hon. and gallant Friend will put his Question down.

PAY AND ALLOWANCES.

Mr. Silkin: asked the Secretary of State for War why there is substantial delay in the case of men who become entitled to increased pay either by promotion or otherwise, in their obtaining the increase?

Mr. Eden: Commanding officers can authorise the issue of increased pay to soldiers as soon as they become entitled to it. In the case of acting rank, however, increased pay is not admissible until the rank has been held for 21 days. It is then issuable with retrospective effect.

Mr. Liddall: asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is aware that in many instances officers of long periods of active service in the present war are still without payment of allowances due to them on acting and temporary rank, respectively; what is the reason for this delay; and whether, to obviate the hardship, he will take steps to see that through command paymasters, bankers, or otherwise, payment is made forthwith in every case of arrears?

Mr. Eden: In the case of officers, payments in respect of acting and temporary

rank are authorised by paymasters and agents as soon as the promotions appear in the War Office or Command Orders. In view of events of the past few months, my hon. Friend will appreciate that the normal processes of recording and notifying promotions made by commanders have been inevitably delayed, but I am looking into the matter with a view to arranging that outstanding cases should be cleared up with the least possible delay.

Mr. Liddall: Is my right hon. Friend aware that there are officers to whom arrears for their wives' extra allowances have been accumulating for eight or nine months? What steps are they to take, whom are they to approach, to get this pay?

Mr. Eden: If my hon. Friend has cases of that kind, I shall be grateful if he will give me particulars. I know that there has been delay, for the reasons which I have given, and I am anxious that it should be cleared up.

Mr. Liddall: If I give specific cases, as I can, with the officers' names, will my right hon. Friend see that they are not prejudiced as a result?

Major Milner: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the present system is much less satisfactory and more troublesome than the simple system for the payment of officers in the last war? Will he look into the two systems?

Mr. Eden: It is a very complicated subject. I do not accept that altogether.

Mr. Burke: asked the Secretary of State for War whether he will give an estimate of the cash values of the pay and emoluments of an unmarried private with no dependant's allowances, and of a married private receiving allowance for a wife and child; and also of the cash values of the various grades of commissioned officers under similar domestic circumstances, as given in the case of privates?

Mr. Eden: As the statement is long and complicated, I will circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the statement:




Pay and Allowances of Combatant Officers.


Daily Rates.


Rank.
Pay.
Accommodation and rations for officer himself.
Family lodging allowance issuable in respect of family of a married officer with wife and one child.
Totals.


Unmarried officer.
Married officer with wife and one child.


Lodging allowance.
Fuel and light allowance (average).
Ration allowance.
If officer is 30 years of age or over.
If officer is under 30 years of age.
Officer who is 30 years of age or over.
Officer who is under 30 years of age.



s.
d.
s.
d.
s.
d.
s.
d.
s.
d.
s.
d.
s.
d.
s.
d.
s.
d.


Second-lieutenant
…
11
0
2
6

8
2
2
6
0
4
6
16
4
22
4
20
10


Lieutenant
…
…
13
0
2
6

8
2
2
6
0
4
6
18
4
24
4
22
10



After 6 years' service

After 6 years' service
After 6 years' service
After 6 years' service



14
6










19
10
25
10
24
4


Captain
…
…
…
16
6
2
6

8
2
2
7
6
4
6
21
10
29
4
26
4



After 11 years' service

After 11 years' service
After 11 years' service
After 11 years' service



19
0










24
4
31
10
28
10



After 14 years' service










After 14 years' service
After 14 years' service




23
6










28
10
36
4
Not applicable


Major
…
…
…
28
6
4
0
1
5
2
2
7
6
4
6
36
1
43
7
40
7



After 22 years' service

After 22 years' service
After 22 years' service




33
6










41
1
48
7
Not applicable


Lieut.-Colonel
…
…
43
0
4
6
2
6
2
2
9
1
4
6
52
2
61
3
56
8











(average)




(average)




Notes.—As regards married officers, the above particulars relate to the case of a married officer who is separated from his family by reason of being on service, this being the position of the majority of married officers in present circumstances.


Lodging, fuel and light and rations will usually be provided in kind for an officer, but the allowances shewn in the above table are those issuable when he is required to provide them himself.

Pay and Allowances of a Private Soldier.


Daily Rates.


Rank.
Pay.
Accommodation and rations for soldier himself.
Family Allowance for Wife and one child.
Totals.


Lodging Allowance.
Fuel and Light Allowance (average).
Ration Allowance.
Unmarried Private.
Married Private with wife and one child.





s.
d.
s.
d.
s.
d.
s.
d.


Private
…
From 2s. for a non-tradesman on first joining to 5s. 9d. for a skilled tradesman with more than three years' service.
1
3

5
2
7
3
3…4 (with an additional 6d. if the family is residing in the London Postal Area).
From 6s. 3d. to 10s.
From 9s. 6.4d. to 13s. 3.4d. (with an additional 6d. if the family is residing in the London Postal Area).


Notes.—Lodging, fuel and light and rations will usually be provided in kind for a soldier, but the allowances shown in the above table are those issuable when he is required to provide them himself.


As regards married soldiers, the above particulars relate to the case of a soldier who is separated from his family by reason of his being on service, this being the position of the majority of soldiers in present circumstances.

AUXILIARY MILITARY PIONEER CORPS.

Colonel Arthur Evans: asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is now in a position to make a statement concerning the title of the Auxiliary Military Pioneer Corps; and whether it is the intention to arm all ranks of this corps 100 per cent. for Defence purposes?

Mr. Eden: While I have every sympathy with the representations made by my hon. and gallant Friend, a change of title would involve many consequential alterations in documents, badges and the like, and I do not think I should be justified in recommending it at the present time. It has now been decided to arm all the British members of the corps.

CONVALESCENCE.

Mr. John Morgan: asked the Secretary of State for War whether he is prepared to support a scheme for affording convalescent treatment, with adequate family allowances over the period, to all men discharged from the Army with a health breakdown following a short period of Army service, after having been initially passed by a medical board, so enabling many such men to become fit to resume the remunerative jobs they vacated on being called up?

Mr. Eden: Provision is made for men who are discharged as medically unfit for further service in that each soldier so discharged is granted one month's furlough with pay and allowances. Normally, the man goes home as soon as it is decided to discharge him, and this provision enables him to have a month's rest if he so desires in which to adapt himself once more to civilian conditions. After the expiration of the month's furlough, if the disability is attributable to service during the war, the man will receive from the Ministry of Pensions any award of pension appropriate to his case, with family allowance if permissible.

Mr. Morgan: Is the Minister aware that the present system is not working satisfactorily, and that there is a large number of men who have not had sufficient convalescence to enable them to recover? Could he extend the system, with a view to bringing improvement?

Mr. Eden: I was not aware of that, but I am quite prepared to look into the matter.

Sir Francis Fremantle: Are proper arrangements made to see that they do actually convalesce during that time?

Mr. Eden: The man goes home. We do not control him there.

ACTING RANK.

Mr. J. Morgan: asked the Secretary of State for War what is the explanation of the order issued from Royal Engineer records requiring that all non-commissioned officers who have not held their rank for 90 days and who were evacuated from France, south of the Somme, shall revert to the rank held before the 90-day limit, seeing that many of the men affected have been on active service since the outbreak of the war and fully earned their promotion?

Mr. Eden: I think my hon. Friend is under a misapprehension. Under the ordinary rules for promotion in war, acting rank is only granted to personnel actually with their units and is held, apart from short absences of less than 21 days, only for so long as they are performing the duties for which such rank is granted, except that if they have held acting rank for three months it is automatically confirmed into war substantive rank. According to a strict interpretation of these rules, a soldier who became detached from his unit during the fighting and evacuation and who, in consequence, ceased to perform the duties for which such rank was given would automatically relinquish it after 20 days' absence. Instructions were issued, however, to protect the soldier from the operation of the normal rules and to allow him, even if he were separated from his unit during the evacuation, to retain his acting rank pending the reorganisation of units. Whether a soldier continued in his acting rank after the reorganisation had been completed would depend upon whether or not he was performing the duties of his acting rank.

Mr. Morgan: Am I to understand from that answer that there may be men who were involved in the evacuation from France on the various occasions who have not been able to ascertain their full rights in this matter and that they are entitled to apply for them, and have been reduced in rank in consequence of their service overseas?

Mr. Eden: My hon. Friend can understand that we have taken special steps to protect their acting rank in these exceptional circumstances.

ENTRENCHING TOOL.

Captain Duncan: asked the Secretary of State for War what type of entrenching tool it has been decided to introduce as an integral part of the soldier's equipment; where it will be carried; and when it is expected that the first issues will be made?

Mr. Eden: The entrenching tool is in the form of a miniature shovel. It is carried in a webbing carrier, attached to the belt of the web equipment. First issues have already been made.

LEAVE.

Mr. Dobbie: asked the Secretary of State for War whether arrangements have been made for home leave for all British Expeditionary Force men who have returned to this country, and what is the nature of same; have free railway warrants been issued for such leave, and is it a special and not one of the regulation leaves; and how many leaves per annum with free warrants are granted to members of the Forces?

Mr. Eden: Arrangements have been made to enable British Expeditionary Force personnel to spend 48 hours in their homes on special leave with a free travelling warrant, additional to the two free warrants a year otherwise admissible for travelling on leave. Almost all of those concerned have already had this special leave.

Mr. Dobbie: Is the right hon. Gentleman considering extending the number of leaves per annum which may be given to Service soldiers?

Mr. Eden: In present conditions, my hon. Friend will realise the difficulty of that.

Mr. Burke: asked the Secretary of State for War why the applications of soldiers for leave on account of serious illness are frequently held up so long that death and, in some cases, burial has taken place before the soldier reaches his home?

Mr. Eden: It is certainly my desire that such applications should not be held up beyond the minimum time necessary for investigation. If my hon. Friend will give me particulars of any cases that have come to his notice, I will have them investigated.

Mr. Burke: Is the Secretary of State aware that he has had a number of cases of long delay from me, and will he see that, whether the delay is caused by muddle or pinpricking, the distress which soldiers naturally feel at these times is not increased by unnecessary delays caused by War Office red tape?

Mr. Eden: I am very anxious that there should be no unnecessary delays, but quick verification is not always easy, as the hon. Member knows.

NATIONAL DEFENCE COMPANIES.

Mr. Lyons: asked the Secretary of State for War to what extent men who enlist in the National Defence Companies are employed in their own localities; whether he is aware that in certain instances older men of this corps, notwithstanding age and their lower medical categories, are on training and duties with young men recently joined for general service; and whether, in view of the object of original National Defence Companies enlistments, he can take steps to offer transfer to their own localities to these older men to serve together and thus replace younger general service men who are there stationed for defence purposes?

Mr. Eden: Men who enlisted in National Defence Companies undertook, by the terms of their enlistment, to serve wherever called upon in the United Kingdom, but every effort is made to enable such men to serve near their own homes, so far as military requirements allow. The younger men are, as a rule, in separate companies. It would not be practicable to arrange any general system of transfer, but I shall be glad to consider any particular cases that are brought to my notice.

Mr. Lyons: If I bring to the notice of my right hon. Friend the cases of a number of men of low category and advancing age who have been taken to the North to work with young, general service men, will he look into the matter personally, without any disciplinary action being risked by these men?

Mr. Eden: There is no question of disciplinary action, but I will gladly look into the matter.

MAIL CENSORSHIP.

Sir Robert Tasker: asked the Secretary of State for War why letters written by soldiers in Ireland are opened by examiners, and are letters sent to soldiers in Ireland opened and examined?

Mr. Eden: Letters written by soldiers in Ireland are subjected to examination in the interests of security. All mail between Great Britain and Ireland, including letters written to soldiers in Ireland, is subject to censorship.

Sir R. Tasker: Are letters written by soldiers in England, Scotland and Wales opened and examined?

Mr. Eden: There is a censorship overseas, but not within these islands.

PRISONERS OF WAR.

Major Leighton: asked the Secretary of State for War what is the position as regards pay and allowances of prisoners of war?

Mr. Eden: Regulations regarding the issue of pay and allowances in respect of prisoners of war have been published in Army Order 71 of 1940, of which I am sending my hon. and gallant Friend a copy.

SUSPICIOUS POLITICAL ACTIVITIES (COMMITTEE).

Mr. G. Strauss: asked the Prime Minister whether the Swinton Committee is attached to any special Government Department?

The Prime Minister (Mr. Churchill): I have already told the House in answer to a Question last week by the hon. Member that it is not in the public interest to give information about this committee or other committees connected with Secret Service, counteracting Fifth Column activities and the like. I take full responsibility for the control, character and composition of the committee, which contains among others a prominent trade union leader.

Mr. Strauss: Can the Prime Minister say how long the trade union leader has been a member of this Committee; whether this Committee is in any way responsible for the police searches which

are going on in many parts of the country in homes of Labour and trade union officials, and does he approve of the prohibition—

Mr. Speaker: The hon. Member must confine his Supplementary Questions to the subject of the Question on the Paper and the answer. I cannot allow all these Questions to be asked.

Mr. Strauss: May I ask this Question, which, I submit, arises directly out of the answer given by the Prime Minister, who went into some detail? May I ask him whether he approves of the prohibition which has gone out that no newspaper may mention this Committee without special permission?

The Prime Minister: Yes, Sir, and I am rather surprised that the hon. Gentleman persists in asking this Question. The Government have stated on their own responsibility that they do not think that it is in the public interest that this should be discussed.

Mr. Strauss: Is the Prime Minister aware that there is very considerable public uneasiness about this matter?

GERMAN UNIVERSITY.

Sir Richard Acland: asked the Prime Minister whether, in view of the fact that the Germans have thought it worth while to announce the establishment of a Breton university in Brittany, he will consider the desirability of establishing a German university in this country?

The Prime Minister: No, Sir. We have plenty of other things to think about at the present time.

Mr. Petherick: Instead of squandering money for the benefit of enemy aliens as the hon. Baronet suggested, will my right hon. Friend adhere to his decision to spend all the money available on bombs and other lethal weapons to destroy the enemy?

The Prime Minister: That is covered by my original answer.

Sir R. Acland: Would the right hon. Gentleman receive a statement on the case to show how very valuable such a step would be?

ENEMY ALIENS.

Mr. Silverman: asked the Prime Minister whether he will instruct every Department of State concerned to describe such persons as may have established their right before a tribunal to the status of refugee from Nazi oppression, by that title, and not as enemy aliens?

The Prime Minister: The expression "enemy alien" merely means a foreigner who is the subject of a State at war with His Majesty. It is fully recognised that many such persons are not hostile to this country and that in referring to them it is better to use such a phrase as "persons of enemy nationality," but it is not always possible to avoid the term "enemy alien" which is the legal description used in certain statutory enactments.

Mr. Silverman: Can the right hon. Gentleman tell us how we are to distinguish between our friendly enemies and our hostile friends?

Miss Rathbone: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the classification of victims of Nazi oppression was notified on all passports as "Friendly Aliens"? Why not stick to a description which is very familiar, namely, "Victims of Nazi oppression"?

INTERNEES (VISITS).

Mr. Silverman: asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware that, as a result of a failure of co-ordination between the Home Office and the War Office, it is now virtually impossible for internees to receive visits, even from their lawyers on urgent business; and whether he will take steps to see that this unnecessary injustice is removed?

Mr. Peake: I have been asked to reply. I am sorry if the hon. Member has experienced difficulty in obtaining information regarding, or permits to visit, internees. I understand that there has been a very large number of applications for permission to visit internees on business matters, and that the Prisoners of War Department of the War Office have been endeavouring to regulate the grant of permits in accordance with the relative urgency of the requests, and, in particular, to give priority to visits to internees who are going overseas.

Mr. Silverman: The hon. Gentleman really answered this Question before I asked it. I wanted to raise the point of Order why this Question was being answered by someone other than the Prime Minister, in view of the fact that for the last eight days I, personally, have been sent from one Department to another and have found nether knowing which was responsible for this matter. For that reason I put the Question down to the Prime Minister because of the lack of co-ordination between two Departments.

Mr. Speaker: I am not responsible for that.

Mr. Silverman: May I ask a Supplementary Question, then, on the answer given? Is the hon. Gentleman aware that at the end of eight days' investigation, of the kind to which I have referred, I was told by a representative of the War Office that no permits were being given to allow internees to be seen by their legal advisers except in such cases as those under which powers of attorney had already been given or the internee was immediately proceeding overseas?

Mr. Peake: Obviously, it is all important that internees should have an opportunity of consulting with their legal advisers. There has been a large number of applications to visit internees, and I understand that the rules laid down by the Prisoners of War Department have had to be modified on the lines of the answer I have already given. If I may explain about the lack of co-ordination referred to in the hon. Member's Question, it is, I think, partly due to the fact that the hon. Member approached the Private Secretary to the Under-Secretary of State for War on a matter in which he is professionally concerned, and a civil servant, placed in a difficult position like that, does not know if an hon. Member is approaching him as a matter of public interest or in his professional capacity. The natural inclination of a civil servant when placed in a dilemma of that kind is to pass the responsibility on to somebody else.

Mr. Silverman: Will the hon. Gentleman explain to the House why on Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday of last week he personally explained to me that permits would be granted but were ultimately refused?

At the end of Questions—

Mr. Silverman: On a point of Order. Would I be in order to give notice now that owing to the unsatisfactory nature of the reply to Question No. 49, I propose to take an early opportunity to raise the matter on the Adjournment?

Oral Answers to Questions — NATIONAL FINANCE.

JERSEY COPPER COINAGE.

Lieut.-Colonel Sir Thomas Moore: asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether Jersey copper coinage is recognised as being valid currency in this country or not?

The Chancellor of the Exchequer (Sir Kingsley Wood): No, Sir. The copper coinage of Jersey is not legal tender in the United Kingdom.

Sir T. Moore: May I ask how these refugees from Jersey are to live in this country, since they had only two hours to get away and no time in which to get any kind of money?

Sir K. Wood: Exchange is made through the banks.

AGRICULTURAL CREDIT FACILITIES.

Mr. De la Bère: asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, since no concession has been made by the banks to the agricultural borrowers in their charges, which remain at 5 per cent. on money borrowed, he will consider a scheme for subsidising credits to approved borrowers in cases which were supported by recommendations from the county war agricultural committees on the grounds of the high interest charges preventing the maximum output being obtained from the farms?

Sir K. Wood: For the reasons explained by my right hon. and gallant Friend the Financial Secretary in the course of the Adjournment Debate on 18th July, I do not think this course is necessary.

Mr. De la Bère: Is my right hon. Friend aware that the lack of money and the high interest charge—5 per cent.—on borrowed money are impeding and holding back the national effort for food production more than anything else to-day? Why is it that he will not do anything?

Mr. De la Bère: asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, since agriculture is recognised to be an industry essential to the war effort, he will give some assurance that the banks would give preference in granting credits to such industries, as compared with non-essential industries; and also an assurance that no collateral security, such as stocks and shares would be required, but that the advances could be made on the standing crops and livestock alone?

Sir K. Wood: The banks are already giving special consideration to requests for credit by industries which are essential to the war effort, including agriculture. Further, I am satisfied that the banks are not insisting on the provision of collateral security for advances to farmers where a farmer's general position, which, of course, includes standing crops and livestock, reasonably justifies the credit required.

Mr. De la Bère: What is the use of all this great pretence and these wordy evasions? Does not the right hon. Gentleman realise that something must be done?

Mr. Speaker: The hon. Gentleman cannot be allowed to ask Supplementaries like that.

Mr. Stokes: Why should the railways have preferential terms over the farmers?

Sir K. Wood: Perhaps the hon. Gentleman will put that Question down.

Mr. De la Bère: Is it that by these wordy evasions the Chancellor of the Exchequer does not know the answer? What does he qualify for if he does not know the answer? [Interruption.] In view of the thoroughly unsatisfactory nature of that reply, I will raise the whole matter on the Adjournment at the first possible opportunity.

Mr. Speaker: If the hon. Member cannot behave, I shall have to ask him to leave the House.

LAND ACQUISITION, ABBOTSINCH.

Mr. Stokes: asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer which of the seven plots of land at Abbotsinch, purchased from seven different owners, were regarded as revenue sales, and which as capital sales?

Sir K. Wood: No information can be furnished as to whether a particular sale


of land is a revenue sale that attracts liability to Income Tax, as the disclosure would involve a breach of the statutory rule that particulars of the Income Tax assessment are confidential.

Mr. Stokes: Is the Chancellor aware that a short time ago he told me that revenue sales would be subject to tax, and is it not right, in view of this particular transaction, that we should know which are revenue sales and which are capital sales? The view of many people is that all the money ought to be returned.

Sir K. Wood: I explained the general principle so far as I could, namely, that these are matters concerning the liability of individual persons which I am not permitted to disclose.

Mr. Kirkwood: Is the Chancellor aware that I have a letter here from the Town Clerk of Paisley in connection with this ground, in which he asks the Government not to buy this land because it would be absolutely impossible to utilise it for the purpose they desire?

PURCHASE TAX.

Commander King-Hall: asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether it is intended that Government publications will be subject to the Purchase Tax?

Sir K. Wood: Yes, Sir.

Mr. Craven-Ellis: Is my right hon. Friend aware of the public indignation about the tax on newspapers?

Commander King-Hall: Does the Chancellor realise that in this particular case the Government are the wholesalers and that a minimum number of Government publications must be printed, so that the only way to get back some of that cost is to sell additional copies to the public?

Commander King-Hall: asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether it is intended that the Bible will be subject to the Purchase Tax?

Sir K. Wood: Yes, Sir. Income Tax is payable on the profits of the sales of Bibles by commercial publishers and booksellers, and the liability of such books to the Purchase Tax would seem no less equitable as a contribution to the war effort.

Commander King-Hall: Does the Chancellor not realise that this publication is in a special category, not only by reason of its content, but also because it can be published only under licence and, therefore, has statutory recognition of its special character?

Sir K. Wood: That may very well be so, but I suggest that a tax on the Bible in these circumstances is a contribution to the national war effort.

Mr. Thorne: Does it not amount to a tax on Christianity?

TOBACCO AND CIGARETTES (ARMED FORCES).

Mr. Shinwell: asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that although the men in the Navy are entitled to duty-free tobacco and cigarettes, the men in the Army and Air Force have no such concession; whether he will take steps to provide the same benefits to all men serving in the Forces, or alternatively, in view of the increased cost of tobacco and postage, consider increasing the pay of the men by 6d. a day?

Mr. Sorensen: asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he appreciates that the Budget proposals will still further depreciate the real value of service pay and allowances and will involve increased hardship on the men and their dependants; and whether he will take action either to increase the soldiers' pay or to secure financial relief or rebate in respect of postage, tobacco and refreshment, travelling expenses or other expenditure?

Sir K. Wood: As I stated in my Budget speech, the increased taxation which is necessary must fall on all sections of the community if, as we must, we are to continue to make our greatest effort. With regard to the particular case of tobacco, however, hon. Members will have noted the statement made by my right hon. and gallant Friend the Financial Secretary in the Debate on the Budget Resolutions on Thursday last, to the effect that the views of the Service Ministers on the matter are being obtained in the light of the increase proposed in the Budget.

Mr. Shinwell: Does the right hon. Gentleman appreciate that the lower-paid men in the Forces are being heavily


burdened by these increased charges, and will he give an assurance that the inquiry to which he has referred will be expedited; and will he advise me shortly when to put down another Question on the subject?

Sir K. Wood: Yes, Sir, I will do that. The inquiry is now proceeding.

Mr. Sorensen: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that there is a good deal of discontent in the Services because of the increased burdens placed upon the soldiers' incomes when so many of them find it difficult to meet their ordinary commitments?

Sir K. Wood: Yes, Sir, but burdens have to be borne by others as well.

Mr. Denville: Cannot the Government afford a miserable sixpence in a case like this?

TRAVEL FACILITIES (ARMED FORCES).

Mr. J. Henderson: asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury whether further consideration will be given to the desirability of providing cheaper railway travelling facilities to members of the Armed Forces on all occasions on which they travel home on leave?

The Financial Secretary to the Treasury (Captain Crookshank): No, Sir. Members of His Majesty's Forces are granted two free railway warrants per annum, and on other occasions may obtain a single ticket at half ordinary single fare or a return ticket at ordinary single fare.

Mr. Henderson: Is the right hon. and gallant Gentleman aware that these railway charges are a very serious burden, particularly on soldiers who have only 7s. a week, and that this is typified by a case given to me yesterday of a man in Carlisle who had to pay £2 4s. 7d. for seven days' leave, the price of the fare from Aldershot to Carlisle, and will not the right hon. and gallant Gentleman do something in the matter as far as the lower-paid soldiers are concerned?

Captain Crookshank: I have already explained to the hon. Gentleman that two free railway warrants per annum are granted, and cheaper rates at other times.

Mr. Lyons: Does my right hon. and gallant Friend realise that the ticket that

is sold to soldiers at one half of the ordinary fare is one half of the old fare and not one half of the present return fare, and, therefore, soldiers getting that concession do not get the concession which many people think they ought to get and which my right hon. and gallant Friend suggests, and will he make some representations to the railway companies accordingly?

GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS (DICTAPHONES).

Mr. Stokes: asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware that typing staff can be reduced by nearly 50 per cent. and shorthand staff often eliminated altogether by the use of dictaphones; and whether, in view of the fact that only 317 dictating machines are now in use in all Government Departments, he will give instructions that their use is to become more widespread?

Sir K. Wood: Whilst I cannot accept all the implications of my hon. Friend's Question, as I have already informed him, a number of these machines are already in use in Government Departments and further will be made available when either economy or efficiency can be expected to result.

Mr. Stokes: Is not the Chancellor aware that this form of machinery was invented a long time ago, and is he satisfied with the progress being made, seeing that it is considered sufficient for only 317 machines to be in operation in all Government Departments?

Sir K. Wood: We introduce them whenever we consider it necessary.

Mr. J. J. Davidson: Is the machinery being altered in order that local advice and opinion can be taken on any such question in the future?

EXIT PERMITS.

Mr. Davidson: asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury (1) whether any restriction was placed on Mr. Davis, pianist to Miss Gracie Fields, when he left this country recently, affecting the amount of money to be taken out; and if so, the amount allowed;


(2) whether any restriction was placed on Miss Gracie Fields when she left this country recently, affecting the amount of money and the value of jewellery to be taken out; and if so, the amount and value allowed, respectively?

Captain Crookshank: My inquiries are not yet completed. Perhaps the hon. Member will repeat his Questions on Thursday.

Mr. Davidson: Will the scope of these inquiries extend to ascertaining how much of these people's resources has been left in this country?

Captain Crookshank: They will be directed to answering whatever is the Question on the Order Paper.

Dr. H. Morgan: Does not the right hon. and gallant Gentleman think that this personal baiting of a fine artiste is quite petty and unworthy of the traditions of this House?

Mr. Davidson: On a point of Order. May I submit to you, Mr. Speaker, that, acting in conjunction with other hon. Members, I was given certain information and considered it my duty to raise this as a question of great public interest, in order to prove either one way or the other that no preferences are being shown to people in any part of the country?

NEUTRAL SHIPPING (GOVERNMENT MEASURES).

Mr. Shinwell: (by Private Notice) asked the Minister of Shipping what steps he proposes to take to prevent neutral shipping resources being used by the enemy?

The Minister of Shipping (Mr. Cross): The course of the war has made necessary new measures for the control of shipping. A large volume of shipping is already under British and Allied control, and this includes a substantial tonnage of neutral shipping on British time charter. While His Majesty's Government remain prepared to take further tonnage upon charter, they propose other measures to ensure that so far as possible shipping which is not controlled by the Allies will not find employment in trades which would in any way benefit the enemy.
Hitherto, the widespread and important shipping facilities under British control have been freely available to all vessels. Such facilities include the provision of bunkers, dry-docking and repairing, insurance, stores and many minor services. It is not reasonable that these facilities should continue to be freely available to shipowners who do not render commensurate service in return, or to those who fail to satisfy His Majesty's Government that they will refrain from carrying on trade which would be injurious to the Allied war effort. The possession of a ship's navicert for every voyage to which the navicert system applies will be essential. Neutral owners who have not already entered into satisfactory arrangements on these lines are invited to do so, and to supply His Majesty's Government with such particulars as may be necessary to establish the character of the trade on which their ships are engaged. Those who give acceptable undertakings will receive for each of their ships a pass called a ship's warrant which will assure them of continued access to the available commercial shipping facilities under British control. Ships which are unable to produce a ship's warrant will be subject to separate inquiries on each occasion on which they desire facilities under British control. This must at least mean delay and inconvenience. I hope that all shipowners affected will lose no time in signing the necessary undertaking themselves or instructing their London representatives to do so.
The scheme comes into operation forthwith. Shipowners or their representatives desirous of participating in the scheme can obtain information as to the undertaking required and as to the scheme generally by application to the Ministry of Shipping.

Mr. Shinwell: Bearing on the question of the use of neutral shipping resources, will the Minister give his attention to the subversive activities now being employed in the United States and other countries as regards neutral seamen? Is he aware that many neutral seamen are now being subverted from their allegiance to this country?

Mr. Cross: That matter has already had my attention for some weeks past, and I am doing everything possible to deal with the situation.

Mr. Lipson: What is to prevent one of these warrants passing into the hands of the enemy?

Mr. Cross: The warrants relate to each individual ship, and they are, therefore, of no use to the enemy.

Mr. Lipson: What would be the position if the enemy captured a ship and obtained its warrant?

Mr. Cross: We should probably catch the enemy out.

DETENTION OF A MEMBER (COMMITTEE OF PRIVILEGES).

Captain Shaw: (by Private Notice) asked the Prime Minister whether he has considered the Motion standing on the Order Paper relating to the detention of the hon. and gallant Member for Peebles and Southern (Captain Ramsay), and whether the Government will refer the matter to the Committee of Privileges?

[That this House is of opinion that the circumstances of the detention of the honourable and gallant Member for Peebles and Southern should be referred to the Committee of Privileges for their examination and report.]

The Prime Minister: Yes, Sir. The Government are prepared to move to refer the question of the arrest and detention of the hon. and gallant Member for Peebles and Southern, to the Committee of Privileges for examination in relation to the Privileges of this House. The necessary Motion will be tabled tomorrow.

Mr. Thurtle: Will the Prime Minister give the House an assurance that, apart from any breach of the Privileges of this House, the hon. and gallant Member will not be treated, in relation to the law, any differently from any other citizen?

The Prime Minister: The Committee of Privileges will deal only with the question of Privilege.

Mr. Garro Jones: While not attributing any bias to those members of the Government who sit on the Committee of Privileges, is the Prime Minister aware that the Committee is constituted of a proportionate number of members not members of the Government? Therefore, will it be proposed to amend the constitution of that Committee in any respect?

The Prime Minister: I see no warrant in the situation for the House not to

repose its confidence in the fair dealing of its Committee of Privileges.

Mr. Mathers: May I ask whether the consideration which is given to this matter will take into account the position of the constituency of the hon. and gallant Member and the fact that at present it is disfranchised?

The Prime Minister: This Question deals only with Privilege.

Mr. Denman: Does the answer imply that the report of the Advisory Committee will not be put before the Committee of Privileges?

The Prime Minister: I think we must see how the Committee of Privileges addresses itself to the task.

Sir Stanley Reed: Will the Prime Minister take into account the fact that many constituencies are disfranchised, not because their representatives have been engaged in subversive activities, but because their Members are engaged in active service for the country?

Mr. Maxton: Will the Committee of Privileges in the examination of this case have the right to the full evidence which is in the hands of the Home Office?

The Prime Minister: The Committee must conduct its own affairs and be responsible to the House for discharging its duties thoroughly. I cannot see any reason why confidential matters affecting public interests should not be laid before the Committee for the purpose of enabling them to form their own opinion.

Commander Sir Archibald Southby: Is the Prime Minister not aware that the Committee have the right to send for persons and papers in the execution of their office?

NATIONAL EXPENDITURE.

Ordered, That a Message be sent to the Lords to request that their Lordships will be pleased to give leave to the Lord Abertay to attend to be examined, as a Witness, before the Navy Services Sub-Committee of the Select Committee on National Expenditure.—[Sir P. Harris.]

SECRET SESSION.

3.58 p.m.

The Prime Minister (Mr. Churchill): A week ago the Government were led to believe that there was a desire in the House to have a Debate about foreign affairs, and that it was the wish of the House for it to take place in secret, so that Members of all parties could say what they really felt about foreign countries without any danger of adding to the number of those countries with which we are at present at war. It is always the desire and also the duty of the Government, so far as possible, to meet the wishes of the House, and arrangements were accordingly made for this afternoon. However, it appears that some of the newspapers prefer that the Debate should take place in public, and we are assured that secrecy is undemocratic, especially in times of war, that it would be wrong for Members of Parliament to have privileges in matters of information not enjoyed by the whole mass of the nation, and that the Government should take the nation and the enemy fully into their confidence and let the whole world see plainly exactly how and where they stand in relation to all other countries in the present critical juncture. These arguments, or others like them, seem to have made an impression in various quarters of the House, and the Government are now in the embarrassing position of a servant receiving contradictory orders from those whom their only desire is to serve. We therefore have found means to give the House an opportunity of expressing by Debate and Division, the opinion whether the Debate should be secret or public. Also we have arranged that this preliminary Debate can itself take place under conditions of the fullest publicity. I conclude by moving,
That the remainder of this day's Sitting be a Secret Session and that strangers be ordered to withdraw.
This is a debatable Motion. The Government will not attempt to influence the opinion of the House on the issue. Unless provoked, we shall take no part in the discussion, and Ministers will take no part in the Division, which will be left to the free vote of the House. After that matter has been decided, my right hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs will, at any point in the

Debate that may be convenient, make his statement, either in public or in private, as the House may have decided. He has already, I believe, taken the precaution of preparing two speeches, both, I am sure, excellent, but one somewhat longer than the other.

Earl Winterton: Earl Winterton (Horsham and Worthing) rose—

Hon. Members: Divide.

4.2 p.m.

Earl Winterton: My hostility to this Motion has already been almost disarmed by the most witty and eloquent speech of my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister, but despite the cries of "Divide," which proceed from some of my hon. Friends, I do suggest to the House that a question of some constitutional importance is involved in this issue between secret and open Sessions, and I do not think it is a question which can be disposed of without some form of Debate. [HON. MEMBERS: "For how long?"] That depends upon the character of the Debate and how many people wish to express their opinions on one side or the other. My right hon. Friend the Prime Minister has made it abundantly clear by his speech that in its genesis this proposal for a Secret Session did not proceed from the Government. Indeed, the Lord Privy Seal in his answers to Questions last week explained that it was not the Government's desire to express any opinion upon the subject, but, he said, there had been expressed in various quarters of the House what he regarded as a majority opinion in favour of a Secret Session. I submit with great respect to the House, whose Members, or at any rate the majority of its Members, I wish to convince, and none of whom I wish to offend, that this is, as I have said, a matter of great importance and that it should be quite clear, if the Debate is to be held in secret, that there is a majority in favour of holding it in secret.
May I, in the first instance, on the general principle of Secret Sessions, recall to the memory of the House this fact? In the whole of the last war, from 1914 to 1918, when the circumstances on many occasions—as, for example, in March, 1918, or earlier—were just as serious as they are to-day, only seven Secret Sessions were held, whereas in this Parliament we have already held five, and if


there is one to-day, it will be the sixth. However unpopular this view may be in the House, I feel bound to give voice to it, because it is certainly held outside, that Secret Sessions are a drag on the formation of public opinion. If the whole House were against me on that point, I should still make that statement, because it seems to me self-evident that the Press and the public properly base their opinion directly on the arguments adduced and the facts disclosed in Debate in this House. Therefore, it is unfair to the Press and the public to hold Secret Sessions save in exceptional circumstances. I would also like to say, if it is not impertinent, that both those bodies—if I may so term them—namely, public opinion and the Press, have, on the whole, behaved exceptionally well in this war. There has been no division of opinion between the public outside and the Press outside and this House, on any question of principle, and I think we owe it to the Press and the public to say so.
I am now about to say something which may provoke interruption, but which, nevertheless, I believe to be true. This House is not a sort of Sanhedrin or a collection of notables. It derives its authority from, and owes its authority to, the representation of the people. In those circumstances, I maintain, on the question of principle, that Secret Sessions can be justified only in the most exceptional circumstances. Those circumstances clearly arise on occasions when, for example, we are discussing questions of defence. Obviously there are occasions when defence should be discussed in private. For example, if it were found necessary in the course of the war to remove two or three high officers from positions in the Army or the Navy and if it would, obviously, be impracticable and impolitic to discuss the matter in public, then there should be a Secret Session. I see quite clearly, as an old Member of the House, that I have not the House on my side in this matter, but I say clearly, and I shall continue to assert with the greatest confidence, that Secret Sessions should be very much the exception rather than the rule, and I claim that public opinion outside and nearly all the Press hold that view very strongly.
Some hon. Members asked how long this Debate would last, and I wish to set an example by being as succinct as possible, but I would ask the House to consider for a moment what are the circumstances which justify a Secret Session in the opinion of this mysterious majority—and I am not seeking to controvert what was said by my right hon. Friend the Lord Privy Seal—which is supposed to exist in the House and was, no doubt, represented by those who shouted "Divide" when I rose to speak. What are the reasons which in their opinion would justify us in holding this particular Debate in secret? Surely this is not the time and not the occasion for giving even the suggestion of secret diplomacy. At one time we were told by opponents of the late Government and by others that one of the things which was doing this country harm, was secret diplomacy. Such a charge would be ridiculous if brought against us to-day, and yet it is bound to be brought against us, if we discuss foreign affairs in secret.
There is another matter which is, I think, of some importance, though my right hon. Friend the Prime Minister in his most charming speech indicated, if I may say so without impertinence, that the whole question was not of great moment. I should have thought there is a real danger at the present time, with the fantastic and wicked lies and propaganda which are being used on the part of certain enemy countries, that it would be suggested, particularly after what happened a fortnight ago—ridiculous as that suggestion would be—that we intended in some mysterious way to discuss in our Secret Session what the peace terms to Hitler would be. If any hon. Member is prepared to deny that, and to say that there is no chance that Dr. Goebbels would do any such thing; if any hon. Member is prepared to say that he knows Dr. Goebbels better than I do, and that Dr. Goebbels would never make such a suggestion, let him get up and say so.
I do not wish to anticipate the course of the subsequent Debate. It would be very wrong, on this Motion, to do so. But I do suggest—in fact, it is well known—that the two main reasons which have actuated the majority who are said to have asked for this Secret Session, are that they wish to discuss our diplomatic


and political relationships with two great countries, one of them in Europe and the other in Asia, and they think, because that relationship is difficult and delicate, at the present time, it would, therefore, be better to discuss it in secret. I ask the House, in all honesty, is that really so? Are we likely to have better relationships with these countries as a result of discussing those relationships in private? I have heard certain arguments used which, frankly, seemed to me to be ridiculous, to the effect that hon. Members might like to put certain views or to ask certain questions which they were not prepared to do in public Debate. If that is so, I suggest that the proper way to put those questions is by a private letter to the Minister. I think it inappropriate and wrong that questions should be put in private on matters of high policy which cannot be put in public. I hope there will be some reply to my arguments. I have not attempted to collect any body of supporters around me. On this matter I am open to conviction, and I am willing to be convinced, if it is shown that I am wrong, but I think even those who disagree with me will regard some of the points which I have put as substantial points, which ought to be considered by a deliberative and representative Assembly.
I would finish with an admonition and a declaration. I believe this House stands very high in public estimation at the present time. I think its enemies, who have always existed, sometimes in frivolous circles outside, have been silent of late. The House certainly stands higher than it did, for example, in the 'eighties when there were constant disorders over the Irish question, and higher even than it did in the days which the Prime Minister and some other hon. Members will recall, immediately before the last war, when we were often on the verge of fisticuffs. I think this House has never commanded higher respect than it does at the present time. If that be so, what justification is there for holding six Secret Sessions in less than a year when, during the whole of the last war, we held only seven?

Mr. Thorne: One hon. Member might throw a book at another hon. Member.

Earl Winterton: I hope my hon. Friend does not suggest that I ever threw a book

at anybody, though I am sometimes, wrongly, associated with that incident. We should be extremely careful on this or any other occasion before embarking lightly upon Secret Sessions. At least reasons for such sittings should be given. In this time, when the lights of freedom are extinguished all over Europe, and when, for obvious reasons, they are dimmed in this country, we should guard its stronghold and its refuge in this House. We in this place are free, proud men and women looking all the world in the face. Let them know how we feel and think and talk. Let them know that our danger may be great, but our determination is greater. There is nothing in the matter of our relationships with foreign Powers which we need be ashamed to say, publicly, in this place.

4.14 p.m.

Sir Percy Harris: I never become agitated about ordinary questions of procedure, but I think it is agreed that the principle of the publicity of our proceedings in the House of Commons is important. The public at present take an intense interest in Parliament—not only the public of this country, but the public throughout the Empire. On the other hand, those who sit on these benches have, as a party, from time to time suggested that Sessions should be held in secret. In the early days of the war we pressed the Government for these Secret Sessions, sometimes without success. We attached then and we still attach great importance to those discussions, in which questions of defence are at issue, being conducted in private. It is obviously impossible for the Government to disclose all the facts to the public. On the other hand, my hon. Friends and I feel that there is no real case against having a full, frank and free discussion on international affairs. If the Prime Minister suggests that there is information which cannot be made public, he should give the House of Commons an opportunity for which there was a precedent during the last war; that is, to hold the first half of our discussions in public up to, say 7 o'clock. [HON. MEMBERS: "No," and "Divide."] Then Members who wish to speak in public can have their opportunity and those who have information of a secret or confidential character will be able to disclose it in the


latter part of the Debate. I understand from the Prime Minister that the Under-Secretary has two speeches. Let him give one speech in public and the more secret and confidential one later in the Debate.

4.16 p.m.

Mr. Wedgwood: I do not think this is in the least an easy question to decide by an early Division. There were centuries during which this House considered that its Debates and its Votes ought to be secret. It took nearly a century of agitation before the House discovered that in its own interest its words ought to be published and public, that criticism of the Government was valuable; and even Governments finally supported that view. Today we are reverting over a great part of the world to the fifteenth or sixteenth century, and in exactly the same way this House is trying to revert to type by keeping its discussions secret and to have a certain private privilege over the people in the country—[An HON. MEMBER:"No."]—It is a privilege to have information given to you which other people do not possess. One of the greatest privileges we enjoy in this House is free access to the Executive.

Mr. Magnay: Is there any reason why this House should not exercise the functions of any ordinary town council and go into committee on things that matter?

Mr. Wedgwood: We are not a town council.

Hon. Members: Divide!

Mr. Wedgwood: I am quite prepared to stop here for a great many hours.

Mr. Speaker: I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will address me.

Mr. Wedgwood: This is not a matter which we can pass over in the light way in which it was dealt in the Prime Minister's speech. Directly I heard the Prime Minister make that speech I knew there would be no hope of getting freedom of Debate to-day. It is because of my fervent hope that I may convert the Prime Minister for future occasions that I address a few words to the House to-day. It is most important that Debates in this

House should not be private committee Debates, but that they should be open Debates. It has been said over and over again, particularly by my hon. Friends on this side, that it is important that we should be able to cross-examine Ministers privately and get information from them.
It has often been advocated on these benches that we should have what the French call the committee system, under which there is a committee dealing with, say, foreign affairs which has free but private discussions with Ministers on matters concerning their Departments. That system has great advantages, and it introduces a large number of people to the Executive. We have got round it in this House. Over and over again Members on both sides, in the 1922 Committee or in Labour party meetings, have been addressed in private by Ministers from whom they have got information which is not made public. They are also able at these meetings to give Ministers their strongly held opinions which it would not be desirable to make in public. That course can easily be worked under our present procedure. All we ask is that the Government must not take advantage of their vast majority to prevent public expression of criticism in this House any more than they can do it in the Press. The Press has been the principal critic of the Government for the last few months—not a hostile critic, but a critic to stimulate their energy. It would be unfortunate if we gave an opportunity to people outside to say that the House of Commons had abrogated its duty of public criticism in favour of the newspapers.
Why was this Debate asked for? It was because some of us were afraid of the policy of appeasement which was so disastrous at Munich being extended to the appeasement of Japan or of Spain or of Rumania. Is there any reason why that could not be said by us in public as by the Press? The whole House and country are vitally interested in whether there has been a change in policy in the Foreign Office of this country, and it is urgently necessary that we should express our anxiety lest this extension of the policy of appeasement, long after we had hoped it had ceased to be, should be carried on by the Foreign Office with their tendency to avoid criticism, to carry through their measures, and then to wash


their hands of the consequences. In the last war the whole criticism from what is called the Union of Democratic Control and from all the Left Wing, was against secret diplomacy. Here we are forgetting that and once more contributing to secret diplomacy. It is all very well to say that in Secret Session we can impress the Under-Secretary for Foreign Affairs.

Mr. George Griffiths: We cannot do that in any circumstances.

Mr. Wedgwood: We hope he agrees with us already. The Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs is not present. The whole object of public Debate is to back up by criticism in this House the criticism expressed in the country, and, above all, to direct that criticism to the people who are criticised. The people we want to criticise are the permanent officials, of course, through the proper political channels. In open Debate the permanent officials are present under the gallery, and they know what is going on; the OFFICIAL REPORT and the Press report it, but when the criticism is made in Secret Session the permanent officials are not there, the country and the Press are not present. There is only the unfortunate Under-Secretary, who cannot possibly remember all that is said in Debate and is not able to look to his permanent officials for anything, and the Debate is wasted. It has no effect whatever on the people who are actually conducting the affairs of the nation.
The first objection to a Secret Session is that it gives the public the erroneous impression that something tremendously secret has been divulged. Everybody who has been at any Secret Session knows that every one of them might just as well have been in open Session. [HON. MEMBERS: "No."] I should be glad to

hear in the subsequent Debate anything which has been said by anybody in Secret Session that could not have been divulged in open Session. The next objection is that the Debate can have no effect upon the people we most wish to affect, namely, the Civil Service and the military heads of the different Service Departments. Then, the holding of a Secret Session impresses the country as a sign of weakness—the fact that we are forced to debate a thing in secret. The country is suspicious, and is bound to be suspicious, not so much about what individual Members are doing, but about what the Government are doing, if the subject of debate has to be discussed in secret. Then there is the far worse effect it has upon Goebbels and Goering. Everything that is reported in the OFFICIAL REPORT Goebbels will—

Hon. Members: Divide.

Mr. Naylor: On a point of Order. May I draw attention to the fact that if this discussion as to whether or not there should be a secret or an open Session continues much longer there will be no Session at all?

Mr. Wedgwood: That is not a point of Order.

Mr. Speaker: The hon. Member may exercise his own powers but must not usurp mine.

Sir William Davison: In order that we may have a decision on this matter without further irrelevancy, I beg to say that I spy strangers.

Whereupon Mr. Speaker, pursuant to Standing Order No. 89, put the Question, "That strangers be ordered to withdraw."

The House divided: Ayes, 200; Noes, 109.

Division No. 64.]
AYES.
[4.33 p.m.


Adams, D. (Consett)
Braithwaite, Major A. N. (Buckrose)
Clynes, Rt. Hon. J. R.


Adams, D. M. (Poplar, S.)
Brass, Sir W.
Colman, N. C. D.


Adamson, W. M.
Broad, F. A.
Cook, Sir T. R. A. M. (Norfolk, N.)


Anderson, F. (Whitehaven)
Broadbridge, Sir G. T.
Crowder, J. F. E.


Anstruther-Gray, W. J.
Brocklebank, Sir Edmund
Culverwell, C. T.


Astor, Major Hon. J. J. (D[...]ver)
Brooke, H. (Lewisham, W.)
Daggar, G.


Astor, Viscountess (Plymouth, Sutton)
Brown, C. (Mansfield)
Davidson, J. J. (Maryhill)


Barnes, A. J.
Brown, Brig.-Gen, H. C. (Newbury)
Da la Bère, R.


Beauchamp, Sir B. C.
Burke, W. A.
Denville, Alfred


Beaumont, H. (Batley)
Burton, Col. H. W.
Dobbie, W.


Beaumont, Hon. R. E. B. (Portsm'h)
Butcher, H. W.
Doland, G. F.


Beechman, N. A.
Campbell, Sir E. T.
Duckworth, W. R. (Moss Side)


Bennett, Sir E. N.
Cazalet, Thelma (Islington, E.)
Duncan, J. A. L. (Kensington, N.)


Benson, G.
Chapman, A. (Rutherglen)
Dunn, E. (Rother Valley)


Bird, Sir R. B.
Charleton, H. C.
Edwards, N. (Caerphilfy)


Blair, Sir R.
Chater, D.
Ellis, Sir G.


Boles, Lt.-Col. D. C.
Cluse, W. S.
Elliston, Capt. G. S.




Emmott, C. E. G. C.
Liddall, W. S.
Ross Taylor, W. (Woodbridge)


Entwistle, Sir C. F.
Lloyd, Major E. G. R. (Renfrew, E.)
Rothschild, J. A. de


Etherton, Ralph
Loftus, P. C.
Royds, Admiral Sir P. M. R.


Evans, Colonel A. (Cardiff, S.)
Lucas, Major Sir J. M.
Ruggles-Brise, Colonel Sir E. A.


Fletcher, Lt.-Comdr. R. T. H.
Lyons, A. M.
Russell, Sir Alexander


Fox, Sir G. W. G.
McCallum, Major D.
Salmon, Sir I.


Frankel, D.
Maclay, Hon. John S. (Montrose)
Salt, E. W.


Fraser, Captain Sir Ian
M'Connell, Sir J.
Samuel, M. R. A.


Fremantle, Sir F. E.
Magnay, T.
Sanderson, Sir F. B.


Gardner, B. W.
Makins, Brigadier-General Sir Ernest
Selley, H. R.


Garro Jones, G. M.
Marsden, Captain A.
Shepperson, Sir E. W.


Gates, E. E.
Martin, J. H.
Silkin, L.


Gibbins, J.
Mayhew, Lt.-Col. J.
Simmonds, O. E.


Gibson, R. (Greerock)
Mellor, Sir J. S. P.
Smiles, Sir W. D.


Graham, Captain A. C. (Wirral)
Mills, Sir F. (Leyton, E.)
Smith, Bracewell (Dulwich)


Green, W. H. (Deptford)
Milner, Major J.
Smith, Rt. Hon. H. B. Lees- (K'ly>


Gridley, Sir A. B.
Mitcheson, Sir G. G.
Smith, Sir R. W. (Aberdeen)


Griffiths, G. A. (Hemsworth)
Molson, A. H. E.
Smith, T. (Normanton)


Griffiths. J. (Llanelly)
Moore-Brabazon, Lt.-Col. J. T. C.
Spears, Brigadier-General E. L.


Gunston, Capt. Sir D. W.
Morgan, J. (York, W.R., Doncaster)
Strauss, H. G. (Norwich)


Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)
Morris, J. P. (Salford, N.)
Strickland, Captain W. F.


Hammersley, S. S.
Morrison, G. A. (Scottish Univ's.)
Stuart, Lord C. Crichton- (N'thw'h>


Hannon, Sir P. J. H.
Mort, D. L.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Sir M. F.


Harland, H. P.
Muff, G.
Tate, Mavis C.


Haslam, Henry
Noel-Baker, P. J.
Taylor, R. J. (Morpeth)


Hayday, A.
Nunn, W.
Thorne, W.


Heilgers, Captain F. F. A.
Palmer, G. E. H.
Thurtle, E.


Hely-Hutchinson, M. R.
Parker, J.
Touche, G. C.


Henderson, J. (Ardwick)
Pearson, A.
Train, Sir J


Henderson, T. (Tradeston)
Peat, C. U.
Tufnell, Lieut.-Commander R. L.


Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel A. P.
Perkins. W. R. D.
Turton, R. H.


Hogg, Hon. Q. MoG.
Peters, Dr. S. J.
Walkden, A. G.


Hollins, A. (Hanley)
Pethick-Lawrence, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Walker, J.


Hollins, J. H. (Silvertown)
Pickthorn, K. W. M.
Ward, Irene M. B. (Wallsend)


Howitt, Dr. A. B.
Pilkington, R.
Watkins, F. C.


Hurd, Sir P. A.
Ponsenby, Col. C. E.
Wayland, Sir W. A


Isaacs, G. A.
Power, Sir J. C.
Webbe, Sir W. Harold


Jenkins, A. (Pontypool)
Pownall, Lt.-Col. Sir Assheton
Welsh, J. C.


Joel, D. J. B.
Profumo, J. D.
White, Sir Dymoke (Fareham)


John, W.
Pym, L. R.
Wickham, Lt.-Col. E. T. R.


Kennedy, Rt. Hon. T.
Quibell, D. J. K.
Williams, Sir H. G. (Croydon, S.)


Kerr, H. W. (Oldham)
Radford, E. A.
Windsor, W. (Hull, C.)


Kimball, L.
Ramsden, Sir E.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel G.


King-Hall, Commander W. S. R.
Rathbone, Eleanor (English Univ's.)
Woods, G. S. (Finsbury)


Lamb, Sir J. Q.
Rawson, Sir Cooper
Woolley, W. E.


Lambert, Rt. Hon. G.
Reed, Sir H. S. (Aylesbury)
Young, A. S. L. (Partick)


Lathan, G.
Reid, W. Allan (Derby)
Young, Sir R. (Newton)


Lawson, J. J.
Rickards, G. W. (Skipton)



Loe, F.
Riley, B.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Leigh, Sir J.
Ritson, J.
Sir William Davison and Sir J.


Leslie, J. R.
Robertson, D.
Wardlaw-Milne.




NOES.


Acland, Sir R. T. D.
George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesey)
MacDonald, Sir Murdoch (Inverness)


Albery, Sir Irving
Gledhill, G.
McEntee, V. La T.


Balfour, G. (Hampstead)
Glyn, Major Sir R. G. C.
Mander, G. le M.


Banfield, J. W.
Gower, Sir R. V.
Mathers, G.


Barr, J.
Granville, E. L.
Maxton, J.


Bartlett, C. V. O.
Gretton, Col. Rt. Hon. J.
Messer, F.


Baxter, A. Beverley
Groves, T. E.
Morgan, H. B. W. (Rochdale)


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Hall, W. G. (Colne Valley)
Morris-Jones, Sir Henry


Bellenger, Capt. F. J.
Hambro, A. V.
Naylor, T. E.


Bossom, A. C.
Hannah, I. C.
Oliver, G. H.


Bromfield, W.
Harris, Sir P. A.
Owen, Major G.


Buchanan, G.
Harvey, T. E.
Price, M. P.


Burgin, Rt. Hon. E. L.
Headlam, Lieut.-Col. Sir C. M.
Pritt, D. N.


Caine, G. R. Hall-
Hicks, E. G.
Purbrick, R.


Cary, R. A.
Holmes, J. S.
Rathbone, J. R. (Bodmin)


Cazalet, Major V. A. (Chippenham)
Horabin, T. L.
Roberts, W. (Cumberland, N.>


Christie, J. A.
Hore-Belisha, Rt. Hon. L.
Robinson, W. A. (St. Helens)


Cocks, F. S.
Hume, Sir G. H.
Rowlands, G.


Collindridge, F.
Jackson, W. F.
Shaw, Major P. S. (Wavertree)


Cooke, J. D. (Hammersmith, S.)
Keeling, E. H.
Shaw, Captain W. T. (Forfar)


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Kerr, Sir John Graham (Sco'sh Univs.)
Shute, Colonel Sir J. J.


Cove, W. G.
Key, C. W.
Silverman, S. S.


Cox, H. B. Trevor
Kirkwood, D.
Sloan, A.


Crooke, Sir J. Smedley
Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Smith, E. (Stoke)


Davies, Clement (Montgomery)
Levy, T.
Smithers, Sir W.


Davies, Major Sir G. F. (Yeovil)
Lewis, O.
Somerville, Sir A. A. (Windsor)


Davies, S. O. (Merthyr)
Lindsay, K. M.
Sorensen, R. W.


De Chair, S. S.
Lipson, D. L.
Southby, Commander Sir A. R. J.


Denman, Hon. R. D.
Little, Sir E. Graham.
Spens, W. P.


Gallacher, W.
Locker-Lampson, Comdr. O. S.
Stephen, C.


George, Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd (Carn'v'n)
Lunn, W.
Stokes. R. R.







Strauss, G. R. (Lambeth, N.)
Viant, S. P.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Summerskill, Dr. Edith
Wallace, Capt. Rt. Hon. Evan
Wright, Wing-Commander J. A. C.


Sulcliffe, H.
Ward, Lieut. Col. Sir A. L. (Hull)



Sykes, Sir F. H.
Wells, Sir Sydney
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Tasker, Sir R. I.
Weston, W. G.
Mr. Wedgwood and Mr. Aneurin Bevan.


Tinker, J. J.
White, H. Graham



Tomlinson, G.

Mr. Speaker: Strangers must withdraw.

Strangers withdrew accordingly.

The following record of the subsequent proceedings is taken front the Votes and Proceedings:

Question again proposed, "That the remainder of this day's Sitting be a Secret Session, and that strangers be ordered to withdraw."

Motion, by leave, withdrawn.

Adjourned accordingly at Seven Minutes before Ten o'Clock.

Resolved, "That the remainder of this day's Sitting be a Secret Session."—[The Prime Minister.]

CONSOLIDATED FUND (APPRO- PRIATION) BILL.

Read a Second time, and committed to a Commitee of the whole House for To-morrow.

ADJOURNMENT.

Resolved, That this House do now adjourn.—[Mr. Whiteley.]